Is Napoles indeed the ‘most guilty’?

It is difficult to understand why President Aquino should be castigated for securing the life of plunder suspect Janet Lim-Napoles after she surrendered to him.  It is his duty to secure the life of a witness who presumably holds direct evidence linking powerful political personalities to the $10-billion pork barrel scam. This scam is perhaps the biggest swindle involving public funds in our history, dwarfing the P728-million fertilizer scam in 2004. It has deprived millions of our countrymen of the immense benefits that could have come from the funds if honestly and wisely spent.

What if Napoles had been assassinated, after she made surrender feelers to the President and then was ignored?  That would have been a bigger scandal, wouldn’t it be?  The President might even be maliciously accused by his political detractors of suppressing evidence to protect friends and perhaps himself.  It is “damned if you do, damned if you don’t.”  The President used his best judgment under the circumstances to protect the public interest by ensuring that the government is able to go into the bottom of the barrel and find out those responsible for scraping it of literally billions of pesos of people’s hard-earned money.

President Aquino should be credited for courageously and fully opening up the Pandora’s box of hidden corruption that has plagued our republic.  To be sure, Napoles is being kept in a safe place, and it would appear indeed that she is being treated differently from other criminal suspects. But we should keep in mind the higher interest of the people. That higher interest is that government should go into the root of the problem and that all guilty parties should be punished so that such gross fraud against the people shall not recur.

As for the “most guilty,” who can be more guilty than the public officials who have betrayed their solemn oath to serve the people and faithfully obey the laws?  Could Napoles do what she allegedly did without their willing connivance?

In a leading case, Mapa v. Sandiganbayan, the Supreme Court ruled that the “justification” of the “decision to grant immunity from prosecution… lies in the particular need of the State to obtain the conviction of the more guilty criminals who, otherwise, will probably elude the long arm of the law.”  On the basis of publicly known facts, Napoles appears to be “one of the most guilty.” But is she the “most guilty”?

—MANUEL F. ALMARIO,

spokesman,

Movement for Truth in History,

Rizal’s MOTH